Author Topic: Agonising tent decision  (Read 1508 times)

Wowbagger

  • Dez's butler
    • Musings of a Gentleman Cyclist
Agonising tent decision
« on: April 21, 2017, 10:51:59 am »
I am resigning myself to the fact that I no longer need my Hilleberg Nallo 3GT. Mrs. Wow doesn't want to do any more camping in a tent she can't stand up in, and, even though I have used it for solo camping, it's overkill, so in due course I shall be advertising it for sale. However, I want a replacement before I sell, and I am weighing up the pros & cons of the Nallo 2 (non GT version) and the Terra Nova Voyager. The Voyager appears to be a lovely 4-season tent and is half the price of the Nallo 2. I have seen, and camped in, a Nallo 2 (thanks Butterfly!) and it's lovely. Does anyone have any experience of the Voyager that would justify spending all that extra cash on a Nallo 2?

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #1 on: April 21, 2017, 11:41:31 am »
We have a Nallo 2GT (and may be interested in the 3GT ;) ).  I love it.  The Nallo 2 was a bit tight for two people and bags, but would be excellent for one.

We also have a Blacks Octane 2, which is their version.  That's a great tent, too, and remarkably good value, but I suspect it fits just below the Vango Spirits in the Nallo-alike stakes.

We also have a Voyager XL. This has the extended porch (not quite as big as the Nallo, but still useful).  It is very stable, but heavier than the Hilleberg.  There is good internal space, and the interior height is maintained across a broader span, which certainly helps. 

Nallo is lighter, much quicker to erect (Voyager is inner-first, a personal dislike), but I think the Voyager wins for waterproofing.  Oh - except when the water ponds on the top, as it sometimes does. :-\

We are all just prisoners here of our own (mobile) device.

Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #2 on: April 21, 2017, 11:47:34 am »
My exploits with a Voyager lasted one tour, it was slow to pitch and very small compared to the Nallo. Saying that some do love them.

Have a look at the Force Ten Xenon 2+ UL it is lighter and cheaper than both the Voyager and Nallo and has lots of space. I am seriously thinking about one and you know I am a Hilleberg diehard. http://www.worldofcamping.co.uk/vango-xenon-ul-2-tent?gclid=CMn1ta-vtdMCFcm6GwodWf8Org#fo_c=273&fo_k=cd88fba65c04648a9004bb513f7b6860&fo_s=gplauk
Most people tip-toe through life hoping the make it safely to death.
Home

Polar Bear

  • aka Michael
Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #3 on: April 21, 2017, 12:01:20 pm »
I'd go 2GT personally as the weight penalty over a 2 is minimal yet you get all of that practical storage and living space keeping damp things out of the sleeping area, and, it's a great space to be in if the weather is inclement and you're resigned to a lazy day.

If I was a hiker I'd probably pick the 2 simply because I love Hillebergs.

Sorry, that didn't help did it? 
Professional McKenzie Friend and Paralegal.          goodem2@gmail.com     07802 709337.

clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #4 on: April 21, 2017, 12:11:17 pm »
I think it's a valuable observation.  The extra space of the GT comes at very little cost of weight or space, and makes it into a tent of luxury for one.  I'd be very very happy to camp alone with ours.

Get a footprint, mind.
We are all just prisoners here of our own (mobile) device.

Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #5 on: April 21, 2017, 12:43:01 pm »
I have nothing to offer in terms of comparison but I'd be interested in your Hilleberg Nallo 3GT if you decide to sell it as our medium tent is starting to wear out.

D.
Somewhat of a professional tea drinker.


Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #6 on: April 21, 2017, 12:59:15 pm »
I think it’s more about the designs than the specific tents and  a bit chalk and cheese.  Tunnel Vs geo, both have pros and cons, tunnel offering better space for weight and geo being more stable.  How much you need the advantages of either depends on what you want to do with it. They’re both overkill for the sort of three season softy cycle camping I do.  If I were to choose between them it would be the Nallo, neither would be on my shortlist as  I much prefer to sleep across the door, it’s a  personal preferences and IMO one of the biggest difference in tent designs and always near  the top of my criteria.
I had a loan of a standard Voyager while my TN Solar 2.2 was in for repair, it was the most stable tent I’ve ever slept in, goes up easy and quick, and tight first time every time.  I like inner first pitching, the slight chance of it getting wet in the seconds it takes to cover it outweighed by not having a dry inner get wet from the fly while travelling.  But for the same weight as the Solar it was seriously cramped for two, less than half the door and porch space and less head room.  I have no Hillie experience to compare, though I have had a Nallo like Lightwave.

Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #7 on: April 21, 2017, 01:23:01 pm »
+1 for the Nallo 2GT solution.

The porch space doesn't add significant weight and being able to sit out a rain shower in the porch is a significant advantage, it's why Mrs trekker and I went for the 3GT.

Sorry I have no experience of the Voyager
Duct tape is magic and should be worshipped

fuaran

  • rothair gasta
Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #8 on: April 21, 2017, 01:33:31 pm »
Yes, they are quite different sorts of tents.
The Wild Country Hoolie 2 Etc is closer to the Nallo. http://www.terra-nova.co.uk/tents-and-spares/all-tents/hoolie-2-etc-tent/
Or the new Alpkit Viso 2. https://www.alpkit.com/products/viso-2

Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #9 on: April 21, 2017, 01:43:08 pm »
After having considered a Voyager, I went for a Hoolie. Going up all in one piece was one of the good points for me.
Pleasure spreads out on the map and the knapsack is full of joy.

Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #10 on: April 21, 2017, 01:44:50 pm »
Do you really need a 4 season tent like he Nallo or the Voyager? Or would you be better off with the reduced weight and better ventilation of a 3 season tent, like one of the yellow label Hillebergs?

Kim

  • An appetite for the epic, but no real stamina
Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #11 on: April 21, 2017, 02:52:29 pm »
I like inner first pitching, the slight chance of it getting wet in the seconds it takes to cover it outweighed by not having a dry inner get wet from the fly while travelling.

Not sure I see the logic?  With inner first the inner is exposed to rain for a short period when you pitch and strike.  Agreed that's not usually a problem.

With outer first, the inner need never be exposed to rain.  You can put it up and take it down in the shelter of the fly and pack it separately so it stays dry.

In both cases, the inner only gets wet from the fly if you pack them together.  I reserve taking an outer-first tent down in a single go for bone-dry conditions and the last day of a tour.
Watching the TV without subtitles is like riding up a hill without using the gears :)

Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #12 on: April 21, 2017, 03:09:20 pm »
I like inner first pitching, the slight chance of it getting wet in the seconds it takes to cover it outweighed by not having a dry inner get wet from the fly while travelling.

Not sure I see the logic?  With inner first the inner is exposed to rain for a short period when you pitch and strike.  Agreed that's not usually a problem.


No, it's when you're striking camp the issues occur.


clarion

  • Tyke
Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #13 on: April 21, 2017, 03:30:12 pm »
I still don't get it.

Our big tent (Equinox 450 IIRC) is a tunnel design, with vis-à-vis bedrooms.  We take down the small bedroom as a matter of course when packing, purely for ease of stowing.  Last weekend, with dry conditions for a pack, but boggy ground from three days of on and off rain, we dropped the large bedroom, and put in the sun for the groundsheet to dry.  If it had been raining, we would have packed that straight away.  Then the fly comes down last.  I have done a complete pack inside a tent, before emerging, putting the panniers on the bike, dropping the fly, and going.  If I had had an inner-first tent, it would have been exposed to whatever rain there was both in erection and strike, and, getting a wet fly off a pitched inner without brushing, spilling or otherwise wetting the inner is quite a skill.
We are all just prisoners here of our own (mobile) device.

Kim

  • An appetite for the epic, but no real stamina
Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #14 on: April 21, 2017, 03:42:35 pm »
getting a wet fly off a pitched inner without brushing, spilling or otherwise wetting the inner is quite a skill.

Somewhat easier with smaller tents.  And no wind.
Watching the TV without subtitles is like riding up a hill without using the gears :)

Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #15 on: April 21, 2017, 04:11:14 pm »
I like inner first pitching, the slight chance of it getting wet in the seconds it takes to cover it outweighed by not having a dry inner get wet from the fly while travelling.

Not sure I see the logic?  With inner first the inner is exposed to rain for a short period when you pitch and strike.  Agreed that's not usually a problem.

I was comparing to a pitch together design, such as the Nallo, where when packed together the inner ends up as wet as the outer. No doubt it's possible to remove the inner first, it'd probably involve a bit of crawling around on the floor, do people do that?  I don't tend to watch how others take their tents down, I'm pretty sure all those I camp with who have such tents pack them as one. IME that leads to a wet inner far more often than in the years I've used an inner pitch tent YMMV

Polar Bear

  • aka Michael
Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #16 on: April 21, 2017, 04:26:41 pm »
I generally pitch and strike as one.   Careful folding allows one to keep the inner dry, especially so as I also leave the footprint in place. 

I've never bothered even in extreme conditions to pack the tent up in separate pieces. 
Professional McKenzie Friend and Paralegal.          goodem2@gmail.com     07802 709337.

Kim

  • An appetite for the epic, but no real stamina
Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #17 on: April 21, 2017, 04:53:03 pm »
As I say, I generally take the inner down separately, unless everything's dry.  Careful folding doesn't help much, because in the morning the outer is usually wet on the inside (if it's raining, it's wet on both sides).  With the Akto, for which I have a footprint, I tend to leave the footprint and outer together, which means the inner can be removed and reattached without getting myself muddy on wet ground.  (I'll sometimes leave it for half an hour to dry out properly before attaching the inner.)  Putting up and taking down the inner isn't any more difficult than doing anything else inside a tent - as always with tents, once you've got the hang of what goes where, it's pretty straightforward.
Watching the TV without subtitles is like riding up a hill without using the gears :)

Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #18 on: April 21, 2017, 05:24:07 pm »
I'm very happy with my MSR Hubba Hubba HP, which is inner first pitching.   It's quick to pitch & strike and has room for two, while being light enough to be used as a solo. 


If you can hang on till Long itch you can put it up for me & have a sit in it.
Not fast & rarely furious

tweeting occasional in(s)anities as andrewxclark

Kim

  • An appetite for the epic, but no real stamina
Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #19 on: April 21, 2017, 05:31:19 pm »
I think that's the thing - outer-first obviously gives you more options, but inner first isn't a deal breaker if it's quick and easy.

I've got one of those now legendary Pro Action tents - which pitches inner-first - and not really had a problem with the inner getting wet, even when it's been chucking it down.  Where that one lets you down is lack of windproofing (which does at least mean minimal condensation) and limited space for Stuff.  It's a warm-weather tent.
Watching the TV without subtitles is like riding up a hill without using the gears :)

Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #20 on: April 21, 2017, 05:56:54 pm »
Whatever the decision, it's a fine agony Wowbagger has.
Pleasure spreads out on the map and the knapsack is full of joy.

Wowbagger

  • Dez's butler
    • Musings of a Gentleman Cyclist
Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #21 on: April 21, 2017, 09:04:42 pm »
If I have read the specs correctly, the Nallo 2GT is only 300g lighter than the 3GT. That is an awful lot of money to spend for that small weight saving.

Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #22 on: April 21, 2017, 10:11:31 pm »
That post from Bikepacker has me now wondering which to get..........
'Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence'.

Martin John Rees.

Wowbagger

  • Dez's butler
    • Musings of a Gentleman Cyclist
Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #23 on: April 21, 2017, 10:26:03 pm »
Bearing in mind that Go Outdoors claim they will beat any other on-line price by 10%...

Re: Agonising tent decision
« Reply #24 on: April 21, 2017, 11:09:05 pm »
You are welcome to borrow our voyager xl to try. I've pitched it in wet weather several times and had no problems with a wet inner. I'm not sure any weight savings are worth the cost of a new tent (although would be happy to swap our nallo 2gt or voyager if you really want ;) )
Anyway, don't you need a tent with room for grandchildren?
Quote from: Kim
^ This woman knows what she's talking about.